General Chat

Despite all the welfare cuts and wage freezes and, in some cases, actual wage cuts, over 6.9 million children (out of 13 million in total) are likely to live in households where they get a decent standard of living in 2015.

This is according to a new report, commissioned by TUC, and carried out by economist Howard Reed.

Reed's definition of "decent standard of living" is drawn up by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

6.9 million children living well in 2015. You could fill Wembley Stadium or the Millenium Stadium 80 times over with them. Or Old Trafford 100 times.

Is that not positive news and a cause to celebrate :-D

No!! what would be positive news and something to celebrate would be 13 million children with a decent standard of living in 2013

Oh! Sorry. My maths is wrong. It should read 5.9 million out of 13 million.

A "decent standard of living" in 2015 requires a lone parent with one child to have £19, 226 (two children £23,992). For a couple with one child, £24, 643 and with two children £29, 093.

Mr Reed considers 54% of our children wil be living bvelow those levels by 2015. But, hey, 46% will be doing well..

Are you serious!! If that is an attempt at sarcasm then it's a poor one

Accompanied by an ill chosen emoticon

Can't win, it seems, Lolly.

Read about this today and thought about what someone said last night about news always being bad. And that I was gloomy and negative.

But you can always put a positive spin on worst news and so I thought I would try that..

Some might think it is awful news. But I intend to concentrate on the 5.9 million lucky ones - more than the whole population of Scotland, or Wales, or New Zealand. :-D

:-S

<3 :-| :-0

Still struggling with emoticons

Yeah right.

I remember an ex Prime Minister of Australia saying that no Australian child would live in poverty.

That was about 20 years ago.

:-P

Have you read?

In the eye of the storm:
Britain’s forgotten
children and families
A research report for Action for Children,
The Children’s Society and NSPCC
Howard Reed, Landman Economics
June 2012

This report contradicts what you have stated as at year 2015.

Please give the title of the TUC requested report or link.

I have a feeling as one was commissioned by the Children's Sciety/NSPCC and the other by the TUC *spits* there is a hidden agenda.

At this moment in time I'm concerned about the here and now and how awfull life is going to get for children in april and the disabled too, by 2015 there will have been so many people made homeless and so many suicides because of the welfair reform bill 2015 doesn't come into the equasion.
I myself may be homeless by then thanks to this stupid goverment :-(

John i find your post utter repulsive and very offence, any your nothing but a venomus an hatefull person if you think that in acceptable.

we have one of the largest economies in the world and we have failed our children

i have on last message for you . i hope i never meet you in the street,

Thanks for you comments, Robert. Nice that we can agree on something :-D :-D

Sue. All I know is that it was a report commissioned by TUC and written up by economist Howard Reed. It was released yesterday (13 March). Concluded that poorest 10% of families will be better off in 2015 compared to 2010 - an average of 57p a week better off. Other families will be worse off.

DWP spokesperson accused TUC of choosing and arbitrary measure (Joseph Rowntree Foundation's definition of acceptable living standards (see above)). DWP spokesperson said "Government was committed to eradicating child poverty by tackling root causes, including unemployment, educational failure and family breakdown. Universal credit will make 3 million people better off. And, by 2014, we will have taken 2 million of lowest earners out of paying tax altogether"

So garden is rosy. All looks like good news to me. :-D

One in five English children reaches 16 without the basic numeracy & literacy needed for the world of work. The rest fight hard to find work - any work.

Sometimes, the best that can be said is it could be worse.

John you are a very SANCTIMONIOUS uncaring person just like your CON-DEMS counterparts. Like Ian Duncan Smith you profess to be a Christian, how can you be so uncaring.

Their are thousands of children, disabled adults and those that this goverments Hired foreign firm have deemed fit for work when they clearly are not who will be trying to live on less than £15 a week because of their NEW Welfare reforms.

I DOUBT YOU ARE ONE OF THEM :-|

The top 20 local authorities for child poverty in the UK are:


1. Tower Hamlets(42% of children in poverty)
2. Manchester(38%)
3. Middlesbrough(37%)
4. Derry (35%)
5. Belfast (34%)
6. Islington (34%)
7. Glasgow City (33%)
8. Liverpool (33%)
9. Newcastle upon Tyne (33%)
10. Hartlepool(33%)
11. Nottingham (32%)
12. Knowsley (32%)
13. Newham (32%)
14. Strabane (32%)
15. Barking and Dagenham (31%)
16. South Tyneside (31%)
17. Hastings (31%)
18. Birmingham (31%)
19. Westminster (30%)
20. Hackney (30%)
....
As you can see, several of these authorities are on the doorstep of the House of Commons. Perhaps it is time they opened their eyes to what is right under their noses rather than what is happening in other countries.

Diane. Please attack the thread, not the messenger. This was a report published in all papers yesterday. I have simply tried to pick the positives out of it.

Any negativity is pounced on on Genes chat, so you can expect to now be heavily criticised by some of my former adversaries. We shall see :-S :-S

I actually hate British politics myself. I think it has been a disaster since Beveridge (Liberal) and Attlee (Labour) and Bevan (Labour). One or two good politicians since then in all parties, but they have been submerged in the general dross. Oops, getting negative - slap on wrist. :-( :-(

I am sure IDS sees himself as a Beveridge Mark II. But Beveridge started with a clean sheet, IDS has inherited 70 years of an increasingly complicated welfare system. He needs to throw huge amounts of money at welfare to get on top of it, but instead is being forced to make big cuts immediately. Hence this fiasco over ATOS and the bedroom tax and much more to follow in next 2 years :-(

So what's the percentage of child poverty in 2012/13?
Would the 46% predicted NOT to be in poverty in 2015 be an improvement, or not?

DET. I believe Howard Reed suggests that a further 460,000 children will be pushed below "breadline" by 2015 compared to 2010.

So perhaps 46% doing OK in 2015 might have been 53% in 2010 (maths not very good).

And, if worst off 10% will be 57p better off in 2015 compared to 2010, the children most affected will be in those just above that level. In families where perhaps the joint income of both parents is about £30k- £40k.

Carol. Thanks for those tables. Don't make a lot of sense in terms of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation figures used by Reed yesterday. He says 54% of children will be in poverty and suggests that about 47% were in poverty in 2010. So DWP and Rowntree must be using totally different measuring tools. Surprise, surprise ;-)

Shame BK's cut and paste has been reported. I was just going to comment that, if anyone wants to know how to kill a thread, BK shows how in his post.

My post did not break any T&C's only in your eyes again.